What a stunned c*nt. This is why there is so much animosity directed at the religious by atheists. Religious people show no real awe and wonder, because god did it, no need to figure out what is really going on. Curiosity is the greatest human trait, without it we would still be living in caves.

Administrator #102 was enjoying the relative quiet of a slow Monday on Fark. It was kind of nice when the week got off to such a start. They seldom did these days. The demands of the queue were low and a story about spiders having feelings was topping the hit list so maybe some of the usual troublemakers were actually getting some work done today for a change instead of making her life miserable.

Of course, she had only finished the thought when the Red Phone illuminated and the insistent chirp-chirp-chirp of its tone reverberated through the control bunker. Only Drew Curtis himself ever called on that line and Administrator #102 tensed reflexively. The Red Phone always meant trouble.

Administrator #102 took a deep breath and then toggled the switch on her console to put the call through her headset. "Yes boss!" she said, mustering as much cheerfulness into her voice as she could. On the other end of the line the sound of harp music and the Beer Waterfall could be heard.

"Good morning, Administrator One-Oh-Two," came the Great One's voice. "I would like you to green a thread for me please."

"Yes sir, no problem sir! Which one?"

"7974769."

"Are, are you sure sir?"

Drew Curtis sighed loudly on the other end of the line. "Do you know who is visiting me today Administrator One-Oh-Two? The Pope. As in does a Pope shiat in the woods. That Pope. And we have a little bet going. So green that headline and make it snappy or you'll be busted back down to sorting repeats on the Video Tab, is that perfectly clear?"

The line went dead.

Administrator #102 was reminded of the time that The Boss deleted the entire Politics Tab. You just did not mess with The Boss when he was in a mood like this. She tapped at the keyboard and greened the thread. Atheists, Oprah, and the main page.

The last time I got suckered into watching Oprah, she had the entire cast of Crash on and they were all talking about what a moving experience it was because it dealt with race and then holy shiat I saw the movie and wanted to punch everyone and Oprah twice. Maybe even kick her.

She's never done anything to me personally, but she's a public person who publicly says stupid things and is therefore being publicly mocked and criticized. It's part of the price that comes with being a media-made billionaire.

I May Be Crazy But...:If you count characters, sure, but what if you measure by amount of ink needed. Maybe half of blue is blue. Or you could go by height and half of blue is blue.

That word has pretty much lost all meaning to me by now.

Semantics can be fun, but if we think about it, these all have very real meanings and explanations for defining "half of blue" (or blew, as one case may be).

Defining terms can be very important when trying to convey thoughts and ideas. The other week I was in a conversation with a theist who was trying to convince me that he had proof of God. He started his proof with a question, "Do you believe in graffiti?" I was unable to respond, because I didn't know what he meant. I asked him to clarify, and he became confused. He didn't understand how I could be confused by his question.

So I elaborated: "What do you mean by 'believe'? I have seen many differing definitions. I've seen some people define the word as having faith without evidence. In this context, there's no need to believe in graffiti; clearly it exists. You just have to walk around any major city or wait for a cargo train to go by to see it. I've seen other definitions that go back to a root system of overarching belief systems, to the point where every though process is tantamount to a belief; as in, 'it requires belief to trust that your eyes are seeing the electromagnetic signals and your brain s converting those signals to the proper image.' In this context, everything you see is based on belief, so everyone would 'believe' in graffiti. Under the assumptions of an objective reality, one typically does not need to belief in graffiti; the mere observation should be enough to convince everyone that it exists. Under the assumptions of a subjective reality, it might take a bit more.

"Now, that's just talking about the existence of graffiti. What if we take it to a different context? What if we talk about graffiti as viable art, or graffiti as a tool for social change? What if we talk about the word itself? A simple question can lead to some very profound discussions and the simple context can easily change the meaning of the word."

Of course, I knew what he was getting at. He was trying to make the claim that I only believe what I can see in front of me. It's a classic argument used against non-believers. So he changed his question, "How do you know graffiti exists?"

Well. The simple answer is: It can be seen. The complex answer is: It can be observed by multiple observations instruments (eyes, touch, smell, analytical instrumentation, etc...); these observations can be reliably and readily repeated by multiple instruments and observers to confirm the existence of graffiti; and the technique of creating graffiti is not only well known and can be repeated, but also follow all currently known laws of physics and chemistry, as well as all reasonable logic.

After that, he accused me of using semantics to derail the conversation and simply told me to read the bible, for proof of God was in there. I haven't heard from him since.

My mom continues to tell me "important" discoveries from that farkstick. I am tired of explaining that he is a quack and a fraud. He may be a leading surgical professor but he has some serious issues with pseudoscience.

mgshamster:I should be in the kitchen: She sounds like a Humanist. Ain't nothing wrong with that!

I have spoken with many deeply religious individuals who truly can't wrap their heads around the fact that you can be in awe of nature and the mysteries of the universe WITHOUT belief in some diety. And it's impossible to explain it in a way they could truly understand, just as it's impossible to explain God in a way that would make me believe.

I doubt that. If I were to explain God as, "This right here is God," followed by a visual/physical presentation of God itself, I'm sure you would believe.

Now, the tricky part is actually finding such a being that fits religious descriptions, but if I could, I'm sure you would start believing.

You know it was a lot easier in the Old Testament. God showed up all the damn time. As a burning bush, made a game out of torturing Job to prove a point to Satan, the pillar of smoke and fire, he was bringing down fire and brimstone to level towns that had orgies, plagues that were obviously his work.

Now that just about everyone on the planet has a cell phone and can take pictures or video on a moments notice farker goes radio silent, and we are supposed to see him in a goddamn sunset. What the hell is that? There is a sunset every single day? Is God just getting lazy, mailing it in like Randy Moss on a play not designed to go to him?

For years, Oprah pushed "The Secret", quasi-religious new age bullshiat that follows the same principles as the name it and claim it evangelical Christian movement.

The fact that she is unable to comprehend atheism doesn't surprise me in the least. You could probably shiat into your hand, and tell her it's a youth-affirming face mask, and she'd rub it all over her.

Nyad's got a point, even if I don't personally care for the way she phrases it.

I'm in awe every time I look up at the stars in the night sky in the country, every time I look at a beautiful landscape, every time I stand at the beach and see how big the ocean is, heck, every time I look at the herbs I'm growing in my window. This universe, this world, the life on it - it's all incredibly wonderful and awe inspiring.

I just don't happen to believe in anything supernatural.

/Also, she's a swimmer with a name synonymous with greek mythological water spirits talking about religion/spirituality. That's amazing.

I've only seen bits and pieces of Oprahs show. One of the more poignant times was Oprah was stating how she changes her sheets every single day (more than like, HAS them changed FOR her), and seemed amazed that the crowd responded that no, they don't change their sheets every day. She actually asked an audience member why, and the response was something like "I am not a millionaire".

She's got it all figured out all right, let them eat cake, apparently.

JohnnyApocalypse:You sure showed him! You didn't just tell him, you made yourself an image and showed him! When it comes to show and tell, you don't skimp on the effort! Because atheists everywhere should be outraged that their... uh... beliefs... uh... well, they are being made fun of by an uncomprehending Oprah! Down with Oprah! Down with morons who aren't offended!

fusillade762:wildcardjack: "Spiritual" is a term of fluffy minded people from many backgrounds. But the spiritual person probably doesn't have the chops to argue atheism with a media figure.

Spiritualism is religion for people with commitment issues.

I've often thought that, but I honestly think that some folks call such evanescent emotional experiences "spiritualism" because they lack a single, simple word to describe such experiences in a secular manner. One can experience awe, wonder, and other emotions without requiring the construct of a deity - or, indeed, any supernatural power - to do so. It's a very humanist response - an experience within the human sphere, and one difficult to communicate.

What I find repugnant about Oprah's response is that it apparently never occurs to her that one can be humanist - you're either a theist or somehow emotionally crippled. Baffling to me.

Gyrfalcon:I'm not sure why so many atheists seem to think that "god" begins and ends with the Judeo-Christian "god", but there you go.

Odd - I find that most atheists seem to think that no such being, regardless of the catechism's source, exists. I've yet to encounter an atheist that says "well, I know the Judeo-Christian God doesn't exist, but I'm not too sure about fairies, kami, Allah, etc., etc." - you're talking about an agnostic at that point.

mgshamster:Defining terms can be very important when trying to convey thoughts and ideas. The other week I was in a conversation with a theist who was trying to convince me that he had proof of God. He started his proof with a question, "Do you believe in graffiti?" I was unable to respond, because I didn't know what he meant. I asked him to clarify, and he became confused. He didn't understand how I could be confused by his question.

To a theist, belief is as good or better than evidence. In this context his question makes perfect sense. Sure you can see graffiti, but more importantly you believe in graffiti. What's better is that in the face of conflicting evidence the belief need not change. It's imagined analogy would be that just because banksy was shot doesn't mean that graffiti doesn't exist. In that same way god exists to him.

Except you, being a rationalist see belief as subordinate to facts. It's okay to believe something unless evidence proves it dead wrong, but you don't hold that belief the same as proof. Graffiti exists to you because you drive by it everyday. You have no need to rely on some lesser positive assertion to crutch about the subject.

This is likely why you were not even agree on the terms. You both use a word that has very different meaning to each other. That fundamental divide guarantees that the argument will devolve into a "semantic" one.

"Spirituality" has always been a part of Oprah's shtick. So of course she's going to tell someone that you have to be religious to experience things that religious people think they invented, like "awe" and "wonder."

So when Oprah said: "Well, I don't call you an atheist then. I think if you believe in the awe and the wonder and the mystery that that is what God is. That is what God is."

The proper response is, "Who the fark told you that?"

Oprah knows she doesn't know everything. But she probably doesn't get told that nearly often enough, like most rich and/or famous people. People are so busy kissing her ass, they probably don't even agree with half the shiat she says, they just don't want to be the "asshole who dissed Oprah."

cman:Farktastic: cman: Christ there are a lot of Oprah bashers in this thread

What did she ever do to you? Did she spit on your hamburger?

Ever been around a group of women who worship her? She's douchebag patient zero in the epidemic of self-entitled douchebags.

She is a highly successful woman who has changed many lives for the better. Her charity work is extremely helpful. I don't know about you, but that makes her a hero in my book

She spawned Doctor Oz and Doctor Phil, two of the most damaging Mass Media "therapists" on the planet. Her "charity" work in Africa has been under fire several times for numerous reasons. Other than being marketing gold for any book that pays her enough to get promoted on her show (some of them blatant plagiarism and outright falsehood) I really do not see an upside.

If she actually spit in my hamburger I am sure I could strike it rich selling it off to one of her worshippers. I just endured the most pedantic non-thinking facebook conversations I have ever seen about her recent show about Robin Thicke. I suppose I should be thankful, I reduced my friend list by 6.

I am constantly amazed that theists feel an irresistible need to re-define atheism to mean something other than "lack of belief in gods." That's what it means, and that is all it means. Why are believers so resistant to that definition?

Lionel Mandrake:cman: Christ there are a lot of Oprah bashers in this thread

What did she ever do to you? Did she spit on your hamburger?

She's never done anything to me personally, but she's a public person who publicly says stupid things and is therefore being publicly mocked and criticized. It's part of the price that comes with being a media-made billionaire.

In fact thats how you become a media-made billionaire - by saying stupid things....

FTFA: "So to me, my definition of God is humanity and is the love of humanity."

^^^That isn't atheism, and I think this woman is a bit confused. This ventures into pantheism territory, I think. Atheists don't believe in a god, in any form, by definition. Being an atheist who knows many other atheists, if this woman were truly an atheist, then I cannot see why she didn't defend the position that one can feel a tremendous and positive emotional response to the many things one can experience, courtesy of this great big universe around us.

With that said, Oprah is still an egotistical, angel-pimping windbag, and "O", how I would love for someone to shove her self-righteousness up her airbrushed-on-every-monthly-cover-of-her-overpriced-magazine ass.

As for Nyad's response to Oprah's idiot question:Off the cuff and rambling... maybe.Stupid... no.

One can be spiritual without believing in a god... that is the problem with some of those who happen to believe in a god, particularly some american "christians". For the life of them they cannot fathom that to simply live, to not be concerned with what happens when this life ends, and to enjoy the here and now of living and being without the Damocles sword of punishment from a supernatural being hanging over my immortal soul... is even possible. I have members of my family who feel this way, and I carefully steer around discussions of religion when I talk to them.

I think I am good to other people simply because that's the way I'd want them to treat me, and not because I fear punishment after I'm dead. I also don't really care if someone acts or is different than me, as long as they aren't hurting anyone else. To live with the kind of fear every that some who profess to be christians seem to experience every waking moment of your life must be a terrible thing... like having to avoid stepping on cracks in the sidewalk forever...

fluffy2097:grumpfuff: I have. I've debated people who were absolutely stunned to find out arguments against the Abrahamic concept of god don't actually work against other religions, ie Hinduism.

Those are your standard Internet Atheist types. You find them infesting /r/Atheism. Most of them have read that Carl Sagan said billions and billions of stars. They also think that pastafarianism is actually something you should follow the rules of. Most of them have read the dust jacket of the holy book of their patron saint Richard Dawkins , but don't care he's actually a womanizing asshole because he gave them a witty one liner to throw at their parents or pastor to get kicked out of religious services / their own homes.

fluffy2097:grumpfuff: I have. I've debated people who were absolutely stunned to find out arguments against the Abrahamic concept of god don't actually work against other religions, ie Hinduism.

Those are your standard Internet Atheist types. You find them infesting /r/Atheism. Most of them have read that Carl Sagan said billions and billions of stars. They also think that pastafarianism is actually something you should follow the rules of. Most of them have read the dust jacket of the holy book of their patron saint Richard Dawkins , but don't care he's actually a womanizing asshole because he gave them a witty one liner to throw at their parents or pastor to get kicked out of religious services / their own homes.

/I want to be re-incarnated as a tree.

I'm insulted you'd imply I'd ever go to that scum of the internet known as Reddit. These were debates with actual people. The rest of your description does fit them fairly well though.

Well I've had Farkers yell at me saying you can't believe in the supernatural and be an atheist too.

As an atheist and a scientist, let me assure you that a person absolutely can be an atheist and believe in the supernatural.

Atheism va theism is a question of one's belief in a deity or deities. We don't really have word choices for those who do/don't believe in the non-deity supernatural things. "Skeptic," maybe, but that word can be used for a lot of other things besides just the supernatural (e.g. conspiracies, aliens among us, etc...)

To add to that "atheism" is a catch all, from the completely non mystical to very religious(but lacking belief in a specific diety).

Most common usage though, is "operating without faith/beliefs" as it pertains to the supernatural. People will quibble over different definitions, but that's what most people mean when they say it.

Kinda how like black people are not actually black, but brownish. White people are not actually white unless they have a condition, they are pale pink to orange.

I lay the blame on people with a mistaken perception. They think the dictionary is the ultimate dictator of what words mean, and refuse to acknowledge context and common usage. What the dictionary actually for is to describe language, and in it's very nature it's outdated.

What matters is how people use WordX currently and commonly.

A billion people call atheist "completely non mystical" and that's what it means, regardless of what some stuffy english scholar or dusty book says. It may have begun as a misunderstanding, but once it gains popular usage, that's the way it is.

That's why pedantic arguments get old really really fast. Very commonly the first option for people who don't otherwise have an argument.(like religious people arguing against atheists).

So willing to "prove" them wrong, but unable, they'll quickly equivocate(as a fallacy) about what an atheist "really" is, and how that person isn't one, therefore the religious person "wins"(a delusional position, obviously, but hey, at least they're reliable).

jst3p:mgshamster: I should be in the kitchen: She sounds like a Humanist. Ain't nothing wrong with that!

I have spoken with many deeply religious individuals who truly can't wrap their heads around the fact that you can be in awe of nature and the mysteries of the universe WITHOUT belief in some diety. And it's impossible to explain it in a way they could truly understand, just as it's impossible to explain God in a way that would make me believe.

I doubt that. If I were to explain God as, "This right here is God," followed by a visual/physical presentation of God itself, I'm sure you would believe.

Now, the tricky part is actually finding such a being that fits religious descriptions, but if I could, I'm sure you would start believing.

You know it was a lot easier in the Old Testament. God showed up all the damn time. As a burning bush, made a game out of torturing Job to prove a point to Satan, the pillar of smoke and fire, he was bringing down fire and brimstone to level towns that had orgies, plagues that were obviously his work.

Now that just about everyone on the planet has a cell phone and can take pictures or video on a moments notice farker goes radio silent, and we are supposed to see him in a goddamn sunset. What the hell is that? There is a sunset every single day? Is God just getting lazy, mailing it in like Randy Moss on a play not designed to go to him?

IMO, God jumped the shark when he showed up on a grilled cheese sandwich. I mean, grilled cheese sandwiches are delicious but I felt he was really phoning it in at that point.

"Well, I don't call you an atheist then," Winfrey replied. "I think if you believe in the awe and the wonder and the mystery that that is what God is. That is what God is. It's not a bearded guy in the sky."

This is like when my drunk dipshiat of a stepfather told our black next-door-neighbor "I don't really consider you as black because you don't act like a thug or rob people or anything"

mbillips:mgshamster: Corvus: Sorry what did the atheist say was stupid?

I guess I missed it.Relatively Obscure: "I think sunsets are pretty."

"THAT'S WHAT GOD IS SO YOU NOW BELIEVE IN GOD AHAHAHAHA"

Well I've had Farkers yell at me saying you can't believe in the supernatural and be an atheist too.

As an atheist and a scientist, let me assure you that a person absolutely can be an atheist and believe in the supernatural.

Atheism va theism is a question of one's belief in a deity or deities. We don't really have word choices for those who do/don't believe in the non-deity supernatural things. "Skeptic," maybe, but that word can be used for a lot of other things besides just the supernatural (e.g. conspiracies, aliens among us, etc...)

Rubbish. If you believe in supernatural beings, there's absolutely no excuse for not believing in god(s), as there's equally convincing evidence. The indictment of theism is the question "How?" OK, God created the heavens and the earth in six days, but how'd he do it? Same thing goes for ghosts, werewolves, etc. If you're an atheist, you have to be a skeptic about beliefs for which there is no physical explanation.

What's the definition of "atheist" again? Lack of belief in a deity. Belief or nonbelief in a deity says nothing about belief or nonbelief in other supernatural things.

For that matter, not everyone is good at analyzing evidence, or cares to analyze evidence. Some people may have no belief in a deity because that's how they were raised, and they never actually looked at the evidence themselves. They are still atheists. They may have also looked at the evidence for ghosts and concluded that the evidence is convincing. Perhaps they think ghosts are not supernatural.

Regardless of the explanation, the word "atheist" is not an all-encompassing term for nonbelief in all things supernatural. It is a term which only and specifically applies to a nonbelief in a deity.

Perhaps you're looking for the term "naturalist" or "skeptic" rather than "atheist"?

Well I've had Farkers yell at me saying you can't believe in the supernatural and be an atheist too.

As an atheist and a scientist, let me assure you that a person absolutely can be an atheist and believe in the supernatural.

Atheism va theism is a question of one's belief in a deity or deities. We don't really have word choices for those who do/don't believe in the non-deity supernatural things. "Skeptic," maybe, but that word can be used for a lot of other things besides just the supernatural (e.g. conspiracies, aliens among us, etc...)

Rubbish. If you believe in supernatural beings, there's absolutely no excuse for not believing in god(s), as there's equally convincing evidence. The indictment of theism is the question "How?" OK, God created the heavens and the earth in six days, but how'd he do it? Same thing goes for ghosts, werewolves, etc. If you're an atheist, you have to be a skeptic about beliefs for which there is no physical explanation.

Uhhhh, what did Diana Nyad say that was idiotic, subtard? She's just a common-or-garden humanist. Atheism =/= nihilism.

GreenSun:You know, if there is really a god and then god decides to appear to all of mankind/alienkind, how do you think people would respond? How do you even know that the thing that appeared is actually god, and not just some kind of more advanced creature that wanted to play around with primitive creatures like us?

FloydA:I am constantly amazed that theists feel an irresistible need to re-define atheism to mean something other than "lack of belief in gods." That's what it means, and that is all it means. Why are believers so resistant to that definition?

To theists, atheism is far worse than someone being a different religion. Atheists, to them, are effectively saying that all those things they cherish are delusional and childish. The more firmly you believe the more your going to demonize. A lack of belief is a real punch to the gut to those people.

Of course that's only the result of the prejudice and the subject matter, Oprah sounded dumb because she was trying to hammer the square peg of "atheists are all psychopathic nihilistic hedonists who believe and feed nothing but the most base and animal of emotions," into the round hole of reality.

Trying to come up with a rationalization that complicated and difficult on the spot will challenge anyone.

Nor do I blame Oprah for having this prejudice, it is the fault of society and the media for creating it. She dealt with a great deal of pain and personal tragedy through the power of faith, and the fact that most religions infect it with certain hatreds and prejudices is not her fault.

Now let's see cman find a way to be very, very concerned about what I just said.

Elzar:mgshamster: JesseL: Elzar: Lionel Mandrake: cman: Christ there are a lot of Oprah bashers in this thread

What did she ever do to you? Did she spit on your hamburger?

She's never done anything to me personally, but she's a public person who publicly says stupid things and is therefore being publicly mocked and criticized. It's part of the price that comes with being a media-made billionaire.

In fact thats how you become a media-made billionaire - by saying stupid things....

[img35.imageshack.us image 750x712]

I say stupid shiat all the time. What am I doing wrong?

You're not saying it with a large enough audience. Also, the stupid things have to resonate with your audience.

Didn't Oprah say, like, five years ago that she was retiring?I will live in "awe" and "wonder" if she ever farking follows through with that statement.And yeah, she's starting to look sort of dry-humpish.

gaslight:Dear everyone: Oprah's show is for people who are at home during the day. By definition, if you have some kind of brain, you are not at home during the day, you're at work. So, her show is for morons.

I experience wonder, as an atheist.I wonder why the religious folks need for me to believe in their imaginary bosses too.Their gods either exist or they don't - my belief has no bearing on the matter.Or, one would think it wouldn't.

gaslight:Dear everyone: Oprah's show is for people who are at home during the day. By definition, if you have some kind of brain, you are not at home during the day, you're at work. So, her show is for morons.

Well I've had Farkers yell at me saying you can't believe in the supernatural and be an atheist too.

As an atheist and a scientist, let me assure you that a person absolutely can be an atheist and believe in the supernatural.

Atheism va theism is a question of one's belief in a deity or deities. We don't really have word choices for those who do/don't believe in the non-deity supernatural things. "Skeptic," maybe, but that word can be used for a lot of other things besides just the supernatural (e.g. conspiracies, aliens among us, etc...)

Soup4Bonnie:The last time I got suckered into watching Oprah, she had the entire cast of Crash on and they were all talking about what a moving experience it was because it dealt with race and then holy shiat I saw the movie and wanted to punch everyone and Oprah twice. Maybe even kick her.

fark Oprah. fark Crash. God damn that movie sucked.

I hate that they named that movie Crash, because any time anyone mentions it, I think of the Cronenberg adaptation of the JG Ballard novel. Which is TOTALLY different.